The Gender Trap: Yes, or Yes?

Warning: I watched parts of the Democratic debate last night at the gym. This is the fate of the resident of the Pacific Time zone.

Watching Hillary Clinton smile as she listened to the final question, for a minute, I almost thought I liked her. But then the closed captioning caught up and I saw that the question had been, "Do you prefer diamonds or pearls?" Clinton's response was, "I want both."

Now a wave of really hating her passed over me. It's not just the starving children in Africa who can't afford precious gemswhich, in case I need to remind you, have absolutely no function other than to advertise that the wearer has the money to buy something with absolutely no function. No, middle-class Americans with kids in school and mortgages can't afford diamonds and pearls. The right answer would have been, "I'm much more worried about getting our soldiers home from Iraq."

But now a wave of compassion for Clinton washed over me (yes, as a matter of fact, I am ambivalent about her). Any answer other than one which could be translated roughly as "I love jewelry" would have insulted the questioner. So Clinton was set up, something like this: "Okay, lady, so you're a politician, but you're still just a girl, right?" And she had to say, "Yes, that's right, I'm just a girla middle-class girl who loves to be pampered."

Now to add insult to injury, the MC then guffawed about whether he could ask the question to any of the other candidateswho are, you know, obviously not girls.

Because gender is the most obvious thing there is, right? Wrong. There are tons of people walking around who aren't immediately readable as male or female. Say it is obvious, as in Clinton's case. The debate question made it seem that her love of jewelryand being regaled with it by a man who pampers and cares for herfollows just as obviously. Huge leap, people! And extremely misogynist.